National Directorate

National Probation Service Performance Report 18 and Weighted Scorecard Q2 2005/06

November 2005
ROGER HILL DIRECTOR OF PROBATION
1 

Foreword
This report contains information on the performance of the National Probation Service in the first half of 2005-06. I am very pleased and impressed to see that the high performance levels reported at the end of the first quarter have been improved upon in every one of the key business areas. Enforcement has improved to 92% with London now also exceeding the target. Performance on accredited programmes is now ahead of target; ECP/unpaid work completions are almost on target (against a substantially increased target); basic skills awards, despite the impact of OLASS continue to be delivered at almost twice the level expected; and the target for the provision of accurate and timely ethnicity data has been exceeded for the first time. In the key indicators that are below target there are encouraging signs of improvement that lead me to believe that the targets are achievable: compliance is now at 81%, just 4% short of the target and DTTO/DRR completions are now at 87% of profile with a record number of completions in September. The table below shows not only how much we are improving but also how much more we are delivering now than at any time in our history. Performance measure Enforcement within 10 days Compliance Compliance including orders allowed to continue Offending Behaviour Programmes ECP / Unpaid work completions DTTO/DRR starts DTTO/DRR completions Basic Skills Starts Basic Skills Awards Sickness Court Report timeliness Accurate and timely ethnicity data 2004/05 87% 66% 79% 15,595 (104%) 38,473 (128%) 10,322 (79%) -34,199 (107%) 9,451 (118%) 12.3 --2005/06 Apr-Sep 92% 69% 81% 7,255 (107%) 24,540 (98%) 6,362 (80%) 1,735 (87%) 23,208 (161%) 7,930 (194%) 11.8 98% 96% Percentage point change

+5%
+3% +2% +3% -30% +1% -+54% 76% - 0.5 days ---

It should be noted that in 2005/06 the targets for: • • • • DTTOs increased from 13,000 to 16,000 commencements Basic Skills starts increased from 32,000 to 40,000 Basic Skills completions increased from 8,000 to 10,000 Enhanced Community Punishment / unpaid work completions has increased from 30,000 to 50,000.

2 

The weighted scorecard The weighted scorecard presented at the end of this report covers the first half of 2005/06. There are, once again some large variations but there isn’t the same level of volatility experienced in the last quarter. In order to make sense of the information in light of the new measures that have been included for the first time, a short explanation is given where any area has moved more than 10 places in either direction since the first quarter. Please note that the data on PPO and high risk offenders that has been collected for August and September has been included in this scorecard. Additionally, data on appointments arranged and kept, and sickness absence information will be included in the next scorecard. It should be noted that some areas’ rankings have been affected by depressed figures on basic skills as a result of the impact of OLASS in those areas. This is true of some of the areas in the North West, South West, particularly Wiltshire, and North East, particularly Northumbria. There are 24 areas above zero on performance against target, three more than at the last quarter. I will reiterate my commitment to Ministers and the Chief Executive of NOMS that at least 90% of areas will be above zero by the end of 2005-06 and my expectation that all areas will be above zero. The results for the first half of the year are good – better than at the same stage in any of the previous years since the NPS was created. I expect them to get better still. Roger Hill Director of Probation National Probation Service

3 

Introduction
Enforcement 92% of relevant cases monitored between April and September 2005 were enforced within 10 days in accordance with National Standards. The NPS achieved the highest ever enforcement figure for a single month of 93% in July. Compliance Compliance measures those cases where there was no second unacceptable failure to comply (third for licences) and includes orders that have been allowed to continue by the court following breach action. At 81%, performance continues to edge towards the 85% target but progress has been slow. The need to find a fair and meaningful measure of compliance is high on the NPD agenda and compliance measurement for next year in terms of target definition is under review. Offending Behaviour Programmes The number of completions of programmes between April and September 2005 is 7% above the profiled (expected) target. The 7,255 completions achieved so far represent an increase over the same period last year of 6%. Enhanced Community Punishment / Unpaid Work 24,540 completions have been achieved between April and September 2005, just 2% below the profiled target. There were 6,779 more completions than at the same stage in 2004-05, an increase of 38%. Drug Treatment and Testing Orders / Drug Rehabilitation Requirements 6,362 DTTOs and DRRs commenced between April and September 2005 meaning that 80% of the profiled target was met. This is against a target that increased by 23% since last year’s. There were approximately 1,500 (31%) more starts during April and September 2005 than during the same period last year. There were 1,735 completions of DTTOs and DRRs between April and September 2005, 87% of the profiled target. However, there were a record 325 completions in September alone which leaves an average of 377 per month until the end of the year for the target to be met. Basic Skills 23,208 offenders commenced basic skills courses during the first half of 2005-06, 61% above the profiled target. There were over 9,000 more starts than at the same stage last year, an increase of 64%. 7,930 basic skills awards were delivered in during the first half of 2005-06, 76% above the profiled target and 4,544 more awards than during the first half of 2004-05, an increase of 134%.

4 

Sickness Absence There was no improvement in the average number of days lost due to sickness per employee in the first half of 2005-06 from the first quarter but at 11.8 days it represents half a day less than the 2004-05 average. Victims Performance on victims remained at the level achieved last year when 93% of victims were contacted within the 8-week standard. This exceeds the 85% target. Risk of harm cases The target is to complete 90% of risk of harm assessments, risk management plans and OASys sentence plans on high risk offenders within five working days of the commencement of the order or release into the community. This is a new performance target for the probation service and areas have required clarification and time in order to provide the data. This is the first time in 2005/06 when all 42 Probation Areas have submitted data, and where the achievement of the three criteria have been required in order to satisfy the target. We now have robust data to report on from August 2005 and this shows performance in England and Wales at 68%. Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPOs) The target is to complete 90% of risk of harm assessments and OASys sentence plans on Prolific and other Priority Offenders within five working days of commencement of the order or release into the community. There were similar issues with those of the high risk target but again we now have reliable data from August 2005. Performance nationally is 66% but there is evidence of improvement between August and September. Court report timeliness The proportion of court reports completed during the first quarter of 2005-06 within the timescale set by the court was 98%. At the time of publication, the 2nd quarter data was not available due to late and poor quality returns from some areas. This information is derived from the monthly court reports extracts made to RDS. In future areas which do not send their data on time or whose data fails the validation checks will score zero on this target in the weighted scorecard. Accurate and timely ethnicity data 97% of data on offenders starting community orders was accurate and timely with respect to ethnicity, as was 95% of data on offenders starting supervision under licence, giving an average of 96% which means that the target was exceeded for the first time. Contact for enquiries For enquiries about any issues relating to this report please contact Roger McGarva, Head of Regions & Performance, Tel: 020 7217 8244; E-mail: Roger.McGarva2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk. For enquiries about the data please contact Paris Mikkides, Head of Performance Standards & Quality Assurance, Tel: 020 7217 8812; E-mail: Paris.Mikkides@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk.
5 

1.

Enforcement and Compliance – April to September 2005

NPS Performance target 6 is that the National Probation Service takes enforcement action in accordance with the National Standard in 90% of cases where the offender has breached his/her order. To fully meet the standard, three things must be achieved: breach action taken on or before a second failure assessed as unacceptable (third failure in licence cases) the court contacted for a hearing date all of this achieved within 10 days. National Standards monitoring on enforcement uses a sample of cases commenced six months previously, so the sample for the reporting period April to September 2005 will contain cases that commenced between October 2004 and March 2005. There has been a steady improvement in performance since April 2001. Period 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep) Enforced within 10 days in accordance with National Standards 53% 64% 77% 87% 92% All cases enforced 69% 77% 87% 93% 96%

The overall performance on enforcement has improved considerably and the 90% target has been exceeded consistently each month since the beginning of the year The detailed data shows that: • • • 38 areas met or exceeded the 90% for breach action within 10 days. 6 areas were within 10% of the target. Only one area was more than 10% below the target.

Compliance over the period was 81% (based on the proportion of cases where there were no 2nd (or 3rd for licences) unacceptable failures or where the order was breached but allowed to continue by the court). The target was increased from 70% in 2004-05 to 85% this year. Twelve areas met or exceeded this new target whilst only one areas missed it by more than 10%.

6 

Enforcement April - September 2005
Region Area name Proportion breached Proportion breached within 10 days whether or not within 10 days 94% 100% 96% 90% 93% 94% 94% 97% 95% 95% 92% 93% 75% 90% 85% 89% 97% 95% 90% 90% 89% 91% 96% 96% 91% 85% 96% 94% 93% 95% 93% 85% 89% 90% 92% 90% 94% 91% 92% 92% 94% 94% 95% 98% 94% 88% 94% 92% 91% 91% 100% 90% 97% 89% 92% 92% 96% 100% 97% 95% 96% 96% 97% 99% 98% 97% 96% 97% 83% 97% 96% 94% 98% 98% 96% 96% 92% 95% 96% 98% 97% 92% 100% 97% 98% 99% 96% 90% 94% 98% 93% 97% 98% 92% 95% 99% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 93% 96% 97% 96% 95% 100% 98% 98% 96% 97% 96% Compliance

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London East London North London South London West London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total

89% 90% 85% 79% 84% 90% 84% 77% 83% 78% 85% 80% 79% 77% 83% 80% 78% 88% 82% 80% 77% 80% 76% 87% 77% 83% 77% 80% 80% 88% 81% 78% 80% 87% 81% 90% 76% 83% 83% 76% 81% 78% 78% 80% 79% 79% 80% 73% 80% 78% 86% 79% 85% 80% 82% 81%

North East

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London Wales

ENGLAND & WALES

7 

Enforcement and Compliance by Month

Breach action taken within 10 days All community orders & licences
94%

Target
92%

90%

Performance

Monthly
88%

86%

84%

82%

Cumulative

80% Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Jan-05 Feb-05 Mar-05 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05

Compliance by Month
90%

85% Actual - orders & licences

Performance

80%

75% Target 70%

65% Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Jan-05 Feb-05 Mar-05 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05

8 

2.

Accredited Programmes - April to September 2005

Accredited Programme Completions against Profiled Target
Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 949 1856 3351 4816 6124 7255 777 1695 3003 4296 5427 6789 8050 9271 10804 11921 13221 15000 122% 109% 112% 112% 113% 107%
Accredited Programme Completions, Cumulative, 2005/6

Actual Profile Percent

16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Apr-05 May-05

Actual Profile

Jun-05

Jul-05

Aug-05

Sep-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Dec-05

Jan-06

Feb-06

Mar-06

Year 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep)

Target 6,267 12,000 15,000 15,000 6,789

Completions 3,431 7,716 13,136 15,595 7,255

% Achieved 55% 64% 88% 104% 107%

The detailed data show that: • • • 26 areas exceeded their profiled target, compared with 18 in the first half of 2004-05. 8 Areas were within 10% of the target. 11 areas were more than 10% below target, half the number in the corresponding period last year The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • Cambridgeshire (55%) Wiltshire (56%) Kent (69%) Cumbria (72%)
9

The best performing areas were: • • • • Lincolnshire (215%) Leicestershire & Rutland (183%) Dorset (180%) Gloucestershire (153%) 

Accredited Programmes Completions April 2005 - September 2005
Profiled completion target 123 48 135 480 786 92 245 113 450 72 84 153 109 65 57 540 123 64 457 227 261 1132 112 99 71 68 164 514 148 78 231 369 826 181 130 71 104 183 669 170 159 61 45 54 489 211 217 180 310 918 55 109 92 209 465 6789 Referrals Orders / Actual Percent of Licences completions completion made achieved target 303 146 463 829 1741 253 467 224 944 120 326 751 195 352 225 1969 661 254 1219 900 1084 4118 377 639 490 1080 113 2699 249 204 701 1643 2797 589 507 194 402 734 2426 611 629 235 240 172 1887 837 624 594 799 2854 147 398 368 908 1821 23256 307 148 200 472 1127 247 179 161 587 126 324 613 139 347 204 1753 340 186 1019 833 938 3316 384 595 482 975 85 2521 253 181 702 1207 2343 480 389 179 356 408 1812 594 518 202 216 171 1701 700 490 541 534 2265 130 299 363 293 1085 18510 104 48 108 455 715 103 308 123 534 63 46 202 128 80 50 569 187 46 541 204 238 1216 89 181 153 77 172 672 140 65 221 383 809 192 90 90 133 183 688 165 160 110 69 30 534 276 222 199 370 1067 53 91 83 224 451 7255 85% 100% 80% 95% 91% Performance

Region West Midlands

Area name Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

Below Above Below Near miss

North East

112% Above 126% Above 109% Above 119% 88% 55% 132% 117% 123% 88% 105% 152% 72% 118% 90% 91% 107% 79% 183% 215% 113% 105% 131% 95% 83% 96% 104% 98% 106% 69% 127% 128% 100% 103% 97% 101% 180% 153% 56% 109% 131% 102% 111% 119% 116% 96% 83% 90% 107% 97% 107% Below Below Above Above Above Below Above Below Above Near miss Near miss Below Above Above Above Above Near miss Below Near miss Above Above Below Above Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Below Above Above Above Above Near miss Below Near miss Above

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London London North London West London East London South Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

Wales

10 

3.

Enhanced Community Punishment (ECP) / Unpaid Work, April to September 2005

Last year’s target of 30,000 completions was exceeded by 28%. This year, against the more challenging target of 50,000 competitions for the year, the NPS is achieving 98% of the profiled completions at the half-way stage.

ECP / Unpaid Work Completions against Profiled Target
Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 3899 8029 12442 16742 20601 24540 4166 8334 12500 16668 20835 25002 29169 33335 37502 41669 45834 50000 94% 96% 100% 100% 99% 98%
ECP / Unpaid Work Completions, Cumulative, 2005/6

Actual Profile Percent

60000

50000 Actual Profile 40000

30000

20000

10000

0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06

Year 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep)

Target 30,000 25,000

Completions 38,473 24,540

Percent of target 128% 98%

Furthermore, the area breakdown shows: • • • 23 areas exceeded their profiled target, up from 20 last quarter 7 areas were more within 10% of their target 15 areas were more than 10% below target The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • • Northumbria (60%) Avon & Somerset (66%) County Durham (79%) London South (72%) Lancashire (74%)
11

The best performing areas were: • • • • • Suffolk (225%) Derbyshire (140%) Leicestershire & Rutland (136%) Hampshire (135%) Cambridgeshire (135%) 

ECP / Unpaid Work Completions April 2005 - September 2005
Region Area name Profiled ECP /Unpaid Target Work Completions 476 186 453 1672 2787 344 857 399 1600 242 279 586 323 332 247 2009 426 229 1547 755 936 3893 435 437 263 265 571 1970 493 272 768 1222 2755 704 642 262 527 689 2823 597 616 240 206 225 1884 877 769 889 1177 3711 216 330 310 714 1571 25002 507 186 367 1529 2589 238 513 411 1162 216 377 630 251 339 556 2369 455 305 1598 557 723 3638 609 594 254 290 659 2406 496 313 679 1177 2665 952 694 297 607 755 3305 395 553 221 172 201 1542 1056 652 761 850 3319 173 326 343 703 1545 24540 Target Achieved 107% 100% 81% 91% 93% Performance

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub-Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-Total London North London West London East London South London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-Total

Above Above Below Near miss

North East

69% Below 60% Below 103% Above 73% 89% 135% 108% 78% 102% 225% 118% 107% 133% 103% 74% 77% 93% 140% 136% 97% 110% 115% 122% 101% 115% 88% 96% 97% 135% 108% 113% 115% 110% 117% 66% 90% 92% 83% 89% 82% 120% 85% 86% 72% 89% 80% 99% 111% 98% 98% 98% Below Above Above Below Above Above Above Above Above Below Below Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Below Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Below Near miss Near miss Below Below Above Below Below Below Below Near miss Above Near miss

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

England & Wales Total

12 

4.

DTTOs /DRRs – April to September 2005

This is the first year there has been a target on actual numbers of completions of DTTO/DRRs. In previous years the target was on commencements with a completion rate target introduced last year. The table below shows the profile towards a 4,000 completions target for the year. It shows a rate of improvement which, if maintained, would mean getting very close to, if not meeting the target.

DTTO/DRR Completions against Profiled Target
Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 261 549 847 1149 1410 1736 329 667 999 1332 1668 1998 2334 2669 2999 3332 3665 4000 79% 82% 85% 86% 85% 87%
DTTO/DRR, Completions Cumulative, 2005/6

Actual Profile Percent

4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05

Actual Profile

Jul-05

Aug-05

Sep-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Dec-05

Jan-06

Feb-06

Mar-06

Year 2005/06 (Apr-Sep)

Target 1998

Completions 1736

Percent of target 87%

The area breakdown shows that: • • • 15 areas exceeded their profiled target. A further 6 were within 10% of meeting the profiled target Leaving 24 areas below target The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • London East (42%) London North (45%) Lincolnshire (52%) North Yorkshire (56%)

The best performing areas were: • • • • Cumbria (190%) Wiltshire (143%) Bedfordshire (140%) South Wales (130%)

13 

Whilst the DTTO/DRR target for 2005-06 relates to completions, it is important that areas do all they can to maximise commencements. The NPD will be monitoring commencements closely and will include a commencements measure in the weighted scorecard if performance falls below 80%.

DTTO/DRR Commencements against Profiled Target
Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 993 1973 3121 4185 5228 6362 1333 2667 4000 5333 6667 8000 9333 10667 12000 13333 14667 16000 74% 74% 78% 78% 78% 80%
DTTO/DRR, Commencements Cumulative, 2005/6

Actual Profile Percent

18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05

Actual Profile

Jul-05

Aug-05

Sep-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Dec-05

Jan-06

Feb-06

Mar-06

Year 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep)

Target 6,000 6,000 9,000 13,000 8,000

Commencements 4,842 6,140 8,519 10,322 6,362

Percent of target 81% 102% 95% 79% 80%

The area breakdown shows that: • • • Only five areas exceeded their profiled target. A further seven were within 10% of meeting the target Leaving the vast majority, 33 areas, below target The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • • Cheshire (36%) Suffolk (43%) Hampshire (43%) Norfolk (46%) County Durham (49%)
14

The best performing areas were: • • • • • Nottinghamshire (111%) North Yorkshire (106%) London West (105%) Thames Valley (102%) Wiltshire (101%) 

DTTO/DRR Completions April 2005 - September 2005
Region Area name Profiled Starts Target target Achieved 36 14 37 127 214 19 56 29 104 20 14 39 24 22 15 134 25 10 142 68 76 321 33 44 21 26 43 167 50 25 64 119 258 36 44 18 48 66 212 48 31 22 14 14 129 98 80 78 87 343 20 33 20 43 116 1998 29 13 23 117 182 20 71 29 120 28 12 23 24 16 13 116 21 19 117 43 88 288 25 43 11 29 35 143 40 14 44 116 214 35 35 20 48 79 217 49 36 17 9 20 131 44 48 33 84 209 17 27 16 56 116 1736 81% 93% 62% 92% 85% Performance Below Near miss Below Near miss

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London North London West London East London South Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

105% Above 127% Above 100% Above 115% 140% 86% 59% 100% 73% 87% 87% 84% 190% 82% 63% 116% 90% 76% 98% 52% 112% 81% 86% 80% 56% 69% 97% 83% 97% 80% 111% 100% 120% 102% 102% 116% 77% 64% 143% 102% 45% 60% 42% 97% 61% 85% 82% 80% 130% 100% 87% Above Below Below Above Below Below Below Above Below Below Above Below Near miss Below Above Below Below Below Below Near miss Near miss Below Above Above Above Above Above Below Below Above Below Below Below Near miss Below Below Below Above

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

15 

DTTO/DRR Commencements April 2005 - September 2005
Region Area name Profiled Starts Target target Achieved 152 60 145 535 892 110 274 128 512 78 89 188 103 106 79 643 136 73 495 242 299 1246 139 140 84 85 183 630 158 87 246 391 882 225 205 84 168 220 903 191 197 77 66 72 603 305 253 295 334 1187 69 106 99 228 503 8000 122 41 105 411 679 54 151 104 309 61 71 120 82 49 34 417 49 37 465 220 261 1032 89 114 78 83 202 566 147 92 180 308 727 97 156 68 124 225 670 170 135 62 47 73 487 250 265 285 269 1069 63 88 73 182 406 6362 80% 69% 72% 77% 76% Performance Below Below Below Below

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London North London West London East London South Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

49% Below 55% Below 82% Below 60% 79% 80% 64% 79% 46% 43% 65% 36% 50% 94% 91% 87% 83% 64% 82% 93% 98% 111% 90% 93% 106% 73% 79% 82% 43% 76% 81% 74% 102% 74% 89% 68% 81% 71% 101% 81% 82% 105% 97% 81% 90% 91% 83% 74% 80% 81% 80% Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Near miss Near miss Below Below Below Near miss Near miss Above Near miss Above Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Below Below Above Below Above Near miss Below Near miss Below Below Below

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

16 

5. Basic Skills - April to September 2005

Basic Skills Starts
Actual Profile Percent Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 4069 8373 12680 16055 19626 23208 2400 4800 7200 9598 11600 14402 18000 21600 25600 30000 34800 40000 170% 174% 176% 167% 169% 161%
Basic Skills Starts, Cumulative, 2005/6

45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05

Actual Profile

Jul-05

Aug-05

Sep-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Dec-05

Jan-06

Feb-06

Mar-06

Performance continues to exceed the profiled target each month Year 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep) Target 6,000 16,000 32,000 14,402 Commencements 5,983 14,971 34,199 23,208 Percent of target 100% 94% 107% 161%

The area breakdown shows that: • • • 42 areas exceeded their target. A further two area were within 10% of their profiled target. Just 1 area was more than 10% below their profiled target. The most serious under-achiever was: • Suffolk (80%)

The best performing areas were: • • • • • • North Yorkshire (351%) Gloucestershire (263%) Lancashire (240%) South Wales (234%) Gwent (227%) Sussex (227%)

17 

Basic Skills Awards
Actual Profile Percent Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 1415 2667 4036 5455 6585 7930 669 1338 2006 2675 3273 4083 4964 5844 6724 7675 8767 10000 212% 199% 201% 204% 201% 194%
Basic Skills Awards, Cumulative, 2005/6

12000

10000 Actual Profile 8000

6000

4000

2000

0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06

Performance exceeded the profiled target every month since the beginning of the year, reaching 194% of the profiled target by the end of the second quarter. Year 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 (Apr-Sep) Target 1,000 4,000 8,000 4,083 Awards 848 2,815 9,451 7,930 Percent of target 85% 70% 118% 194%

The area breakdown highlights just how good the half-year results have been: • • 43 areas exceeded their target Leaving just 2 areas below their profiled target. The two areas below target were: • • Wiltshire (84%) Northumbria (86%)

The best performing areas were: • • • • • • Suffolk (453%) Hertfordshire (316%) London West (293%) West Mercia (291%) Kent (282%) Avon & Somerset (279%)

18 

Basic Skills, April 2005 - September 2005
Region Area Profiled Starts Target 274 107 261 963 1605 198 494 230 922 140 161 338 186 191 143 1157 245 132 891 435 539 2242 250 252 151 153 329 1134 284 157 442 704 1587 406 370 151 303 397 1626 344 355 138 119 130 1085 539 445 519 636 2139 124 190 179 411 905 14402 Starts % Profiled Performance Profiled Target against Awards Achieved starts Target 158% 171% 104% 184% 166% Above Above Above Above 70 28 67 247 412 69 172 80 320 36 41 87 48 49 37 297 85 46 310 151 187 779 64 65 39 39 85 291 73 40 114 181 408 104 95 39 78 102 418 120 123 48 41 45 377 138 114 134 163 549 32 49 46 106 232 4083 Awards % Profiled Performanc Target e against Achieved awards 223% 123% 291% 171% 196% Above Above Above Above

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

433 183 272 1774 2662 281 489 351 1121 231 208 354 189 203 114 1299 397 209 1617 1045 744 4012 465 397 203 189 513 1767 451 550 581 832 2414 697 347 184 688 637 2553 773 796 217 312 280 2378 628 678 1076 845 3227 140 433 240 962 1775 23208

157 34 195 424 810 141 147 176 464 63 76 187 151 83 166 726 85 125 679 308 302 1499 123 179 97 107 162 668 198 70 184 267 719 127 268 49 116 240 800 334 233 86 41 38 732 170 334 336 241 1081 40 78 65 248 431 7930

North East

142% Above 99% Near miss 153% Above 122% 166% 129% 105% 102% 106% 80% 112% 162% 158% 181% 240% 138% 179% 186% 158% 134% 124% 156% 156% 159% 351% 131% 118% 152% 172% 94% 122% 227% 161% 157% 225% 224% 157% 263% 216% 219% 117% 152% 207% 133% 151% 112% 227% 134% 234% 196% 161% Above Above Above Above Above Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above

204% Above 86% Below 221% Above 145% 176% 184% 216% 316% 169% 453% 244% 100% 272% 219% 204% 161% 193% 191% 277% 250% 273% 192% 229% 271% 174% 162% 148% 176% 122% 282% 126% 149% 236% 191% 279% 189% 179% 100% 84% 194% 123% 293% 251% 148% 197% 125% 159% 142% 235% 185% 194% Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London London North London West London East London South London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

Wales

19 

6.

Race and Ethnic Monitoring

Home Secretary’s Race Equality Targets – Monitoring at March 2003 At the end of December 2000, 9.8% of probation staff were from minority ethnic backgrounds (see regional breakdown below) compared with a target of 8.4% set for 2009. Probation Statistics published for the year ending March 2003 (the latest available) show that overall the representation of minority ethnic groups in NPS staff for England and Wales, was 11.3% against 9% in the Labour Force Survey 2001 (LFS). All of the regional targets have already been met across the NPS with some significant improvements since 2000. Some additional achievements have been made: • • • • The first minority ethnic chief officer was appointed in 2001. There are 6 minority ethnic board chairs. (None of the previous 54 committee chairs was.) There are presently 84 minority ethnic board members (there were only a handful previously on probation committees). There are particularly encouraging trends in specific probation areas. Bedfordshire, Greater Manchester, Leicestershire & Rutland, London, Merseyside, Nottinghamshire, South Yorkshire, Warwickshire, West Midlands & West Yorkshire all indicate that over 10% of their staff are from minority ethnic groups. As these are local areas with significant clusters of people from minority ethnic communities, it reflects a Service that is increasingly representative of the communities it seeks to serve. ACO/Area Manager grades have seen a small rise from 13 at the end of 2001 to 15 at the end of March 2003. A scheme to provide for development needs such as mentoring and coaching is being implemented to identify and develop talented minority ethnic staff. 9.2% of senior probation officers (middle managers) are from minority ethnic groups. This has increased from 8.6% in 2001 and exceeds the March 2009 target of 6.5%. Overall the March 2003 figures show the proportion of minority ethnic main grade probation officers at 12.1%. Each of the 42 probation boards published a Race Equality Scheme by 31st May 2002. The Actions Plans within each of these Schemes will help to ensure that the NPS, as an organisation, fulfils its duties under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and promotes race equality and equality of opportunity for all staff. Implementation of race and ethnic monitoring according to the Census 2001 16+1 categorisation. More focussed approaches to work with racially motivated offenders are being developed. Interventions are being tailored to minority ethnic offenders and community safety work with minority ethnic groups is being reviewed.

•

• • •

• •

The table below shows performance against regional targets as at December 2000 and March 2003 along with the 2009 targets.

20 

Region West Midlands North East East North West East Midlands Yorks & Humber South East South West London Wales England & Wales

Target set 11.6 1.4 4.9 5.4 7.2 5.1 3.6 2.6 26.5 1.7 8.4

2000 Achieved 13.3 1.7 4.9 6.1 8.6 8.4 4 3.3 30.2 2.3 9.8

2003 Achieved 18.0 4.0 6.1 8.4 10.2 9.7 5.0 3.6 26.6 3.9 11.3

Above/Below Target Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above

Missing Data
The 16+1 census classification of race and ethnicity became mandatory in April 2003. In Performance Report 13, we published data from RDS (from Areas’ quarterly listings, formerly Form 20 returns) showing the proportion of new orders and licences made between January and April 2004 that did not have a correctly entered race and ethnic classification. We have updated and published that information in subsequent Performance Reports. Performance has improved consistently with each quarter and is now of a sufficient robustness to allow RDS to publish the number of starts of community orders by ethnicity for the first time. It is hoped that its inclusion in the weighted scorecard has driven performance still further, so that in the last in quarter for which data is available, (April – June), the target was exceeded for the first time.

21 

Persons commencing supervision by the Probation Service, April to June 2005
Average All court orders Licences Total % with valid Total % with valid starts ethnic code starts ethnic code North East Teesside County Durham Northumbria North West Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire West of Midlands West Mercia Staffordshire Warwickshire West Midlands Eastern Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk London South East Hampshire Kent Thames Valley Surrey Sussex South West Avon & Somerset Devon & Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Wales Dyfed-Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales England & Wales 1,515 532 1,370 707 504 1,396 3,062 1,637 844 655 1,375 2,712 871 831 441 501 1,209 837 842 384 2,720 381 640 989 702 574 424 6,079 100 100 99 98 91 98 97 96 96 98 98 98 97 99 100 99 97 93 95 94 99 99 88 99 88 99 99 95 306 128 302 210 181 391 1,027 508 287 125 426 624 209 193 101 152 292 401 250 62 1,675 109 131 227 158 101 106 2,223 100 99 99 96 92 99 97 94 95 99 97 97 91 97 97 99 88 89 92 94 97 96 85 97 84 97 100 95 100 100 99 97 92 99 97 95 95 99 98 97 94 98 98 99 92 91 93 94 98 98 87 98 86 98 100 95

1,465 1,054 1,218 539 722 755 870 366 349 387 326 486 534 1,311 45116

98 100 92 97 99 96 99 98 96 97 94 100 94 99 97

340 235 270 77 156 237 222 127 94 59 68 128 147 374 13439

95 100 91 92 83 87 95 98 94 90 99 99 88 94 95

97 100 92 95 91 91 97 98 95 93 96 100 91 96 96

22 

7.

Sickness Absence - April to September 2005

From 1st July 2001, local areas were required to monitor sickness absence using a standard format and provide quarterly monitoring returns to the NPD. Reporting was increased to monthly in July 2002. The target for 2002/03 was 10 days or fewer sickness absences per employee. This was reduced to an average of 9 days per employee for 2003/04 and has remained at 9 days since. Many areas already have good systems for monitoring and managing absence and such good practice is being shared across the national HR network. This includes: • • • • • • • • A ‘Case Management’ approach to tackling long term absence. Monthly statistical feedback to line managers. Return to work interviews. Probation Board reports. Automatic referral to occupational health. Healthy Roadshows. Stress counselling/health care services. Constant chasing.

In the first half of 2005-06, performance has improved by half a day from the 2004-05 average of 12.3 days to 11.8 days per employee. Sickness absence is not included in the weighted scorecard at the end of this report but it will be included in the next report. Seven areas are currently achieving the target by having fewer than nine days sickness per employee per year, with a further five areas are achieving the old target by having fewer than 10 days. The best performing areas were: • • • • • North Yorkshire (5.7) Gloucestershire (7.4) Derbyshire (8.0) Hertfordshire (8.1) Avon & Somerset (8.3) The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • • London North (17.4) London East (15.4) London West (15.4) Bedfordshire (15.0) Greater Manchester (14.7)

Details of area and regional performance are shown on the next page.

23 

Sickness Absence, April 2005 - September 2005
Region Area Short Long DDA term term related sickness sickness sickness 1502 362 945 4711 7519 823 2210 1003 4036 683 681 1648 720 991 607 5329 1053 569 3302 1641 1605 8171 772 1502 777 770 949 4769 1408 481 1715 2723 6328 1859 867 610 845 1896 6076 1870 804 530 292 468 3964 981 1167 1201 1106 2497 6953 488 727 587 1533 3335 56480 1027 607 926 4657 7217 944 1813 1285 4042 1050 242 1125 261 693 278 3649 1007 437 6112 2086 1597 11238 661 1201 463 1223 1562 5110 930 182 1618 2674 5404 1641 1784 427 1645 1467 6964 538 1555 1032 320 329 3774 1527 1672 1536 1939 3824 10498 343 901 819 2472 4535 62431 49 0 430 7 486 131 0 271 402 11 131 0 168 149 8 466 0 16 108 452 388 964 14 0 159 0 107 280 0 0 60 80 140 0 0 121 2 2 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 130 4 136 0 0 132 22 154 Total days lost 2578 969 2301 9375 15223 1898 4023 2560 8481 1744 1054 2773 1149 1832 893 9444 2060 1022 9522 4179 3590 20373 1447 2704 1398 1993 2618 10159 2338 663 3393 5477 11872 3500 2650 1157 2492 3365 13164 2408 2359 1562 612 797 7737 2509 2839 2739 3174 6325 17587 831 1628 1538 4027 8023 Total Ave Ave Ave Average Performance staff days days days days (target = 9 years Short Long DDA - absence days) term term related 209 97 188 661 1155 148 382 187 717 116 110 262 141 138 105 873 178 85 649 300 386 1598 182 294 113 130 252 970 226 117 402 521 1265 275 234 127 209 306 1151 290 230 109 83 72 784 163 163 192 207 504 1228 75 124 144 295 638 7.2 3.7 5.0 7.1 6.5 5.6 5.8 5.4 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.3 5.1 7.2 5.8 6.1 5.9 6.7 5.1 5.5 4.2 5.1 4.3 5.1 6.9 5.9 3.8 4.9 6.2 4.1 4.3 5.2 5.0 6.7 3.7 4.8 4.0 6.2 5.3 6.4 3.5 4.9 3.5 6.5 5.1 6.0 7.2 6.3 5.4 5.0 5.7 6.5 5.8 4.1 5.2 5.2 5.4 4.9 6.2 4.9 7.0 6.2 6.4 4.7 6.9 5.6 9.1 2.2 4.3 1.8 5.0 2.6 4.2 5.6 5.1 9.4 7.0 4.1 7.0 3.6 4.1 4.1 9.4 6.2 5.3 4.1 1.6 4.0 5.1 4.3 6.0 7.6 3.4 7.9 4.8 6.1 1.9 6.8 9.5 3.8 4.6 4.8 9.4 10.3 8.0 9.4 7.6 8.6 4.6 7.2 5.7 8.4 7.1 6.0 0.2 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.0 1.4 0.6 0.1 1.2 0.0 1.2 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.2 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.2 0.3 12.3 10.0 12.3 14.2 13.2 Above Near miss Above Above

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

North East

12.9 Above 10.5 Above 13.7 Above 11.8 15.0 9.6 10.6 8.1 13.3 8.5 10.8 11.5 12.0 14.7 13.9 9.3 12.7 8.0 9.2 12.4 15.3 10.4 10.5 10.4 5.7 8.4 10.5 9.4 12.7 11.3 9.1 11.9 11.0 11.4 8.3 10.3 14.3 7.4 11.1 9.9 15.4 17.4 14.3 15.4 12.6 14.3 11.1 13.1 10.7 13.6 12.6 11.8 Above Near miss Above Below Above Below Above Above Above Above Near miss Below Near miss Above Above Above Above Below Below Above Above Above Near miss Above Above Below Above Above Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon & Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London London East London North London South London West London Central London Sub Total Dyfed-Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

London Wales

3152 122063 10379

24 

8.

Victim Contact – April to June 2005

The NPS Business Plan makes it clear that the National Probation Service delivers services to victims as well as offenders. The National Standard for victim contact work is that probation areas should offer face-to-face contact between the victim (or family) and a member of the probation service (or agent) within 8 weeks of the offender being sentenced. The NPS target is to make initial contact within that timescale in 85% of all eligible cases. This was exceeded for the first time in 2003/04 and performance continued to improve during 2004/05 with 93% of victims contacted in accordance with the national standard. That high level of performance has been maintained in the first quarter of 2005-06. Period covered Number of named victims 15,041 15,904 15,647 15,539 4,145 Number of victims contacted within 8 weeks 9,523 12,949 14,276 14,504 3,872 Percentage of victims contacted 63% 81% 91% 93% 93%

April 2001 to March 2002 April 2002 to March 2003 April 2003 to March 2004 April 2004 to March 2005 April to June 2005

Further analysis of the figures shows that:

• • •

38 areas met or exceeded the 85% target Three areas were within 5% of the target Only one area fell short of the target by more than 10%

These areas hit 100%: • • • • • • • • • Northumbria Suffolk Leicestershire & Rutland Northamptonshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Wiltshire Gwent Dyfed/Powys

Areas failing to achieve the target: • • • • Hertfordshire (55%) Humberside (80%) Hampshire (80%) Bedfordshire (84%)

25 

Victim Contact
All Cases, April 2004 - June 2005 Region Area Number of No. contacted Target Performance named within 8 weeks achieved victims 125 116 93% On or Above 77 75 97% On or Above 75 69 92% On or Above 287 273 95% On or Above 564 533 95% 114 114 100% On or Above 71 68 96% On or Above 70 61 87% On or Above 255 243 95% 74 62 84% Near miss 39 38 97% On or Above 68 61 90% On or Above 49 27 55% Below 82 80 98% On or Above 26 26 100% On or Above 338 294 87% 113 106 94% On or Above 46 39 85% On or Above 140 134 96% On or Above 133 120 90% On or Above 271 252 93% On or Above 703 651 93% 88 77 88% On or Above 92 92 100% On or Above 21 20 95% On or Above 25 25 100% On or Above 147 142 97% On or Above 373 356 95% 86 69 80% Near miss 40 38 95% On or Above 152 152 100% On or Above 187 187 100% On or Above 465 446 96% 133 107 80% Near miss 88 83 94% On or Above 22 19 86% On or Above 67 64 96% On or Above 106 101 95% On or Above 416 374 90% 92 85 92% On or Above 22 20 91% On or Above 18 16 89% On or Above 38 38 100% On or Above 91 89 98% On or Above 261 248 95% 555 44 39 124 8 215 519 44 38 118 8 208 94% On or Above 100% 97% 95% 100% 97% On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Midlands Total North East Northumbria Teesside County Durham North East Total East Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East Total North West Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Merseyside Greater Manchester North West Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Total Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East Total South West Avon & Somerset Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Devon/Cornwall South West Total London Total Wales Gwent North Wales South Wales Dyfed/Powys Wales Total

England & Wales Total

4145

3872

93%
26 

9.

Court Report Timeliness in Magistrates' Courts April to June 2005

The aim is to improve the timeliness of the NPS reports to the magistrates' courts. National Standards 2005 specify that the report should be provided in accordance with the timescale set down by the commissioning court. The figures presented overleaf show the proportion of reports that were completed to the deadline set by the court and include fast and standard delivery reports to magistrates’ courts. This is the first time this approach has been used, so comparison with other years is not possible. Based on the new method of measurement, the NPS completed 98% of court reports within the deadline set by the court. The area breakdown shows all areas exceeding the 90% target. The data is for the first quarter of the year as late and poor quality returns meant that Quarter 2 data could not be used. The table below shows performance against the previous 15-day standard for completing PreSentence Reports (PSRs). Performance peaked in 2001-02 when this was a cash performancelinked measure and fell sharply in 2003-04. Performance for 2004/05 improved to 73%. 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Year 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 55% 58% 63% 68% 75% 79% 78% 65% 73% No. provided in response to request 119,875 110,712 107,172 No. provided within 15 working days of request 93,322 72,141 78,754 % meeting standard 78% 65% 73%

27 

Timeliness of Court Reports to Magistrates Court April 2005 to June 2005
Probation Area
Total provided Number provided on time Performance against court's timescale

Avon & Somerset Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire County Durham Cumbria Derbyshire Devon/Cornwall Dorset Dyfed/Powys Essex Gloucestershire Greater Manchester Gwent Hampshire Hertfordshire Humberside Kent Lancashire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire London Merseyside Norfolk North Wales North Yorkshire Northamptonshire Northumbria Nottinghamshire South Wales South Yorkshire Staffordshire Suffolk Surrey Sussex Teesside Thames Valley Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Yorkshire Wiltshire England & Wales

275 317 449 344 301 229 454 373 207 189 491 188 885 243 760 268 401 352 658 336 239 1366 394 206 266 287 249 788 702 814 722 433 237 168 641 414 208 184 526 3253 1499 202 21518

273 314 445 344 298 222 453 362 198 188 490 186 836 239 748 258 395 344 650 335 239 1319 391 200 264 287 243 787 699 799 720 430 235 164 631 413 200 181 519 3194 1489 200 21182

99% 99% 99% 100% 99% 97% 100% 97% 96% 99% 100% 99% 94% 98% 98% 96% 99% 98% 99% 100% 100% 97% 99% 97% 99% 100% 98% 100% 100% 98% 100% 99% 99% 98% 98% 100% 96% 98% 99% 98% 99% 99% 98%

28 

10.

Performance on Risk of Harm and Prolific & other Priority Offenders (PPOs)

There are two performance targets relating to protecting the public from harm and protecting the public from prolific and other priority offenders • 90% of risk of harm assessments, risk management plans and OASys sentence plans on high risk offenders are completed within five working days of the commencement of the order or release into the community. 90% of risk of harm screenings / full analysis (as appropriate) and OASys sentence plans are completed on Prolific and other Priority Offenders within five working days of commencement of the order or release into the community

•

Although measurement on these key targets began in April, data quality issues have meant that it is only from August 2005 that we have reliable data. This is shown at area level in the following pages. It is important to note that in some areas the percentages are derived from very small numbers. The detailed data shows that half the probation areas achieved above 80% on the high risk target. The range of performance, however, demonstrates the full spectrum, from 0% to 100% and is erratic even within regions. Five areas achieved 100%: Avon & Somerset, Dorset, Lincolnshire, Gwent and North Wales Areas performed less well on the PPO target which was met or exceeded by only nine areas, with a further eight getting to within 10%. It is acknowledged that performance on both these key indicators is some way off the target but it is expected to improve now that it is being reported on and included in the weighted scorecard routinely.

29 

Performance against Target on High Risk Cases, August - September 2005

Region/Area
West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-total East of England Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-total North West Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside Regional Sub-total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-total Yorks & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-total South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-total London London East London North London South London West London Wales Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-total

All high risk

All meeting the target 10 7 3 113 133 6 14 4 24 7 4 16 4 0 3 34 20 2 49 100 12 183 32 14 7 7 28 88 42 5 13 47 107 2 6 4 5 11 28

%

Performance against target (90%)

13 9 24 134 180 7 16 11 34 12 11 17 12 3 11 66 24 9 57 192 35 317 34 17 7 13 33 104 50 10 24 60 144 8 13 6 6 40 73

77% 78% 13% 84% 74% 86% 88% 36% 71% 58% 36% 94% 33% 0% 27% 52% 83% 22% 86% 52% 34% 58% 94% 82% 100% 54% 85% 85% 84% 50% 54% 78% 74% 25% 46% 67% 83% 28% 38%

Below Below Below Near Miss Below Near Miss Near Miss Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Below Below Near Miss Below Near Miss Below Below Below Above Near Miss Above Below Near Miss Near Miss Near Miss Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Near Miss Below Below

7 12 6 11 13 49 13 20 9 28 70 13 4 13 46 76

7 10 6 5 12 40 11 17 6 19 53 11 4 13 40 68

100% 83% 100% 45% 92% 82% 85% 85% 67% 68% 76% 85% 100% 100% 87% 89%

Above Near Miss Above Below Above Near Miss Near Miss Near Miss Below Below Below Near Miss Above Above Near Miss Near Miss Below

England & Wales

1113

758

68%

30 

Performance against Target on PPO Cases, August - September 2005

Region/Area
West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-total East of England Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-total North West Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside Regional Sub-total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-total Yorks & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-total South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-total London London East London North London South London West London Wales Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-total

All high risk

All meeting the target 3 4 3 36 46 7 13 12 32 6 6 6 5 0 6 29 11 1 20 35 4 71 15 37 8 8 27 95 8 5 13 14 40 6 6 3 30 5 50 17 17 3 1 4 42 10 2 7 5 24 4 5 8 10 27

%

Performance against target (90%)

3 6 6 58 73 9 18 18 45 6 16 6 21 1 19 69 13 6 24 57 8 108 18 37 9 12 27 103 10 10 22 20 62 13 35 5 31 24 108 30 19 6 2 6 63 11 2 8 9 30 7 5 9 13 34

100% 67% 50% 62% 63% 78% 72% 67% 71% 100% 38% 100% 24% 0% 32% 42% 85% 17% 83% 61% 50% 66% 83% 100% 89% 67% 100% 92% 80% 50% 59% 70% 65% 46% 17% 60% 97% 21% 46% 57% 89% 50% 50% 67% 67% 91% 100% 88% 56% 80% 57% 100% 89% 77% 79%

Above Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Below Above Below Below Below Below Near Miss Below Near Miss Below Below Below Near Miss Above Near Miss Below Above Above Near Miss Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Below Near Miss Below Below Below Below Above Above Near Miss Below Near Miss Below Above Near Miss Below Below Below

England & Wales

695

456

66%

31 

10.

Weighted Scorecard Q2, 2005-06

The Weighted Scorecard covering April to September 2005 is shown below. The table provides comparisons between the latest position and that in the previous scorecard. It shows areas that have: Moved the most places up: • • • • • Surrey Sussex Dyfed/Powys Bedfordshire Devon & Cornwall Moved the most places down: • • • • • Norfolk Cumbria Wiltshire Kent Cheshire

There were 10 areas that moved more than 10 places up and 10 areas that moved more than 10 places down since the previous quarter. Some of the volatility was caused by problems with the IAPS data extraction in Quarter 1 which placed some areas in falsely low positions. The new targets on PPOs and high risk have also contributed to the volatility. In order to explain some of the volatility, a new feature in this edition includes a brief explanation next to each area whose position is more than 10 places above or below the position in the previous scorecard. Of course some areas will have moved up by virtue of general, across the board improvements.

32 

Area name

Leicestershire & Rutland Surrey Devon & Cornwall Essex Warwickshire County Durham Lincolnshire Northamptonshire London North North Wales Sussex South Wales Teesside Gwent Dorset Staffordshire Nottinghamshire Bedfordshire Dyfed/Powys Derbyshire Cheshire Greater Manchester North Yorkshire Hampshire West Yorkshire West Midlands Humberside Northumbria London South Suffolk Lancashire Cumbria London East Thames Valley South Yorkshire Avon & Somerset London West Kent Wiltshire Merseyside Norfolk Gloucestershire Cambridgeshire West Mercia Hertfordshire Grand Total

Performance against Target 70 34 28 33 30 38 12 19 19 20 23 21 16 14 9 18 18 16 8 4 9 0 -2 5 -4 -3 4 -11 -13 -21 -17 -21 -24 -27 -18 -30 -34 -31 -50 -39 -52 -52 -58 -61 -92 -194

Perform- Overall Position Position Diffe- Explanation last time rence ance Perform- now against ance Average 1 1 0 58 129 2 33 31 General improvement, IAPS 54 88 3 21 18 Improved OBP, ECP; good on PPO & High risk 58 86 4 8 4 46 79 5 11 6 49 79 6 10 4 30 68 7 20 13 Improved ethnic data; good on PPO & High risk 52 65 8 7 -1 35 54 9 27 18 Improved ethnic data; good on PPO & High risk 35 54 10 12 2 31 50 11 37 26 General improvement, IAPS 24 47 12 22 10 23 44 13 5 -8 28 44 14 25 11 100% on ethnic data, PPO & High risk 22 36 15 4 -11 Slippage on 4 targets, poor PPO 21 30 16 16 0 7 26 17 29 12 Gen. improvement, good high risk, 100% PPO 7 25 18 39 21 Gen. improvement, esp.ethnic data, 100% PPO 9 25 19 44 25 General improvement, especially on basic skills 11 19 20 13 -7 14 18 21 3 -18 Poor compliance, slippage on basic skills 9 18 22 15 -7 13 12 23 9 -14 High risk and PPO 12 10 24 30 6 -2 4 25 23 -2 8 4 26 35 9 6 3 27 19 -8 -4 0 28 14 -14 Basic skills - impact of OLASS 1 -9 29 43 14 Improvement, esp. enforcement and ethnic data -1 -14 30 34 4 0 -20 31 31 0 -6 -24 32 2 -30 High risk, PPO, ethnic data -4 -25 33 38 5 -13 -37 34 24 -10 -13 -40 35 36 1 -23 -41 36 26 -10 -16 -46 37 40 3 -24 -58 38 18 -20 High risk , PPO -28 -59 39 17 -22 Slippage on basic skills, ECP & compliance -24 -74 40 28 -12 High risk, PPO, -36 -75 41 6 -35 High risk, PPO (0% on both) -40 -92 42 42 0 -40 -92 43 41 -2 -44 -102 44 32 -12 High risk & PPO -41 -102 45 45 0 -92 -184 211 17

33 

150

Leicestershire & Rutland Surrey Devon & Cornwall Essex Warwickshire County Durham Lincolnshire Northamptonshire London North North Wales Sussex South Wales Teesside Gwent Dorset Staffordshire Nottinghamshire Bedfordshire Dyfed/Powys Derbyshire Cheshire Greater Manchester North Yorkshire Hampshire West Yorkshire West Midlands Humberside Northumbria London South Suffolk Lancashire Cumbria London East Thames Valley South Yorkshire Avon & Somerset London West Kent Wiltshire Merseyside Norfolk Gloucestershire Cambridgeshire West Mercia Hertfordshire

100

BAND 1

50

BAND 2

0

BAND 3

-50

BAND 4 -100

BAND 5 -150

-200

35